Howard wages war on Australian workplace

When the new Senate sat for the first time in July, Australia trembled: those supporting Prime Minister John Howard with anticipation, those opposed to his policies with fear.

Last October's elections delivered Howard a fourth term and an assured place in history as the nation's second-longest serving leader and absolute control of both Houses of Parliament for the first time in more than two decades.

Now, with his new one-seat majority in the Senate in operation, there seemed nothing to prevent Australia being shaped completely to his designs.

But this week, with one member of his Government crossing the floor to vote down one of his cherished reforms, the truth has come home: nothing can be taken for granted.

Parliament is now steeling itself for what should have been Howard's great triumph - industrial laws that would break union power once and for all and do away with many of the rights and conditions that have defined the Australian workplace for decades.

Instead, the question is whether Howard has let his ambition run beyond his ability to deliver. Even if he manages to suppress internal opposition and steer his package through the Senate - almost certainly not without compromise - his Government at the next elections could well succumb to the political injuries inflicted on it.

The truth is that apart from a hard core of support from business and industry, the proposed industrial reforms have alienated the bulk of Australia, from suburbs given voice in opinion polls, to every State government, to churches, unions, community groups and even to organisations such as the Returned Services League.

Within the Government, the package has unnerved backbenchers with an eye to their survival at the next election, and strained relations between the Coalition partners. Barnaby Joyce, the rookie Queensland National Party Senator who crossed the floor this week to vote with Labor on competition law, may do the same on the industrial package.

Howard cannot guarantee his reforms' passage through the Senate. Nor would he be wise to dissolve parliament if they were blocked to seek a new electoral mandate - the risks are too great of losing his Senate majority, if not Government.

Howard's problem is that he has not only attacked unions, his proposed laws also attack the nation's attachment to rights and conditions won so long ago that most workers cannot conceive of life without them.

Sacred industrial totems such as public holidays - even Christmas, Good Friday and Anzac Day - overtime, penalty rates and meal breaks have been targeted.

Howard argues that in the golden world he has created, where the economy is thriving and skills are in increasing demand, workers will be able to negotiate these conditions into their contracts. Critics question how well 18-year-old school leavers would stand up to their first bosses, and dispute his assumption of an ever-glowing economy.

Most Australians do not share his optimism. The Roy Morgan consumer confidence rating has fallen to its lowest level since September 11, 2001, immediately following the terror attacks on the US.

But Howard has become used to success. Apart from successive election wins, he has pushed through laws against all odds - a goods and services tax as a prime example.

This week he announced his long-promised industrial reforms, granting five basic conditions: an adult minimum wage of A$12.75 ($13.71) an hour; four weeks' annual leave, with two weeks able to be traded for cash; 10 days of personal or carer's leave a year; up to 52 weeks' unpaid parental leave; and a maximum of 38 ordinary working hours a week.

Anything more than this would need to be won through negotiation under laws that for the first time would allow employers to hire workers at below-award conditions.

There would be no legal entitlement to paid meal breaks, overtime, penalty rates, shift loadings, allowances, or minimum notice periods for termination of employment, and employees of companies with fewer than 100 workers would no longer be able to sue for unfair dismissal.

The Government would gain the power to declare strikes illegal if it deemed them contrary to public welfare or the economy, and unions would need to organise secret ballots through the Australian Electoral Commission before walking out.

Interim injunctions against strikes would become easier to get, as would claims for damages and actions to deregister unions. State awards, under which many workers sheltered from increasingly tough federal conditions, would be replaced by single national awards governed by Commonwealth legislation.

Country unites in opposition to plans

The storm of opposition has well and truly broken on Prime Minister John Howard, with a daunting array of opponents.

* Public opinion: Appalled by the loss of such great Aussie traditions as the "smoko" and distrust of employers, Australians have rebelled against the reforms. Since July, polls have shown opposition to the proposals and increasing unhappiness with Howard. A Morgan poll found only 17 per cent supported them and just 10 per cent felt they would be better off. A Newspoll in the Australian this week showed surging support for Labor.

* The states: All have agreed to join a High Court challenge against a direct assault on their rights, guaranteed under the constitution.

* Unions: The unions have been running a huge campaign against what the Australian Council of Trade Unions sees as the worst set of reforms in history. This week, it presented to Parliament a petition of 160,000 signatures protesting at the changes and on November 15 will hold a nationwide "Day of Community Protest", linked by Sky TV. This month 30,000 people turned out for a protest at Sydney's Olympic Park. Howard has struck back with his own multimillion-dollar campaign, marked this week with four full pages of advertisements in the nation's major papers.

* All other political parties: Importantly, this includes Family First's sole senator, Steven Fielding, whose vote would be critical in any rebellion within Government ranks.

* Churches: The major churches have been scathing of the proposals, claiming they would undermine the family and turn workers into robots.

* Community and welfare groups: These groups, including the Returned Services League, traditionally a supporter of conservative Governments, have warned of the social implications of the proposed reforms. The RSL is furious that for many workers, Anzac Day would no longer be a public holiday.

* The Government: Some backbenchers, especially in marginal seats, fear the reforms could tip them out of Parliament. More significant is the Nationals' Barnaby Joyce, a rebellious first-term Senator, who killed Howard's competition reforms by joining Labor and wiping the Government's majority. Joyce has expressed concern at the industrial package and this week refused to rule out another crossing of the floor. Howard has already been forced into a small concession - allowing a brief Senate inquiry into the planned laws - otherwise he is determined to see his package through. "The reforms are major but not extreme," he said. "They are sensible steps to strengthen the Australian economy and bring forth the next wave of productivity, which will benefit all Australians."